|
Subject: Re: [xsl] return of the XSL FAQ From: "Graydon graydon@xxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 18:40:40 -0000 |
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 05:08:28PM -0000, Liam R. E. Quin liam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx scripsit:
> I'll wait a few more days to give others a chance to comment
> (especially Dave himself!). But i'm leaning towards keeping the
> existing 1.0/2.0 FAQ unchanged (except e.g. if there are broken links
> etc) and starting a new one that incorporates XSLT 3 and current work
> and implementations.
I'd prefer that outcome.
There's that line about the past is another country, and they do things
differently there; I think that's a distinction well worth maintaining
about XSLT 1 as distinct from current practise.
XSLT 2 and especially 3 are substantially more capable languages; I
would want to be making that clear from the outset, in "Only use 1 if
you're actively compelled" terms.
--
Graydon Saunders | graydonish@xxxxxxxxx
^fs oferiode, pisses swa mfg.
-- Deor ("That passed, so may this.")
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
| <- Previous | Index | Next -> |
|---|---|---|
| Re: [xsl] return of the XSL FAQ, Michael Müller-Hille | Thread | [xsl] XSLT 4: xsl:template/@select, Graydon graydon@xxxx |
| Re: [xsl] return of the XSL FAQ, Debbie Lapeyre dalap | Date | Re: [xsl] XSLT 4: xsl:template/@sel, Graydon graydon@xxxx |
| Month |